Supports rescissionA0 noneSubstance 5/24Posted September 16, 2026 On Regulations.gov
Scored directly — The comment's whole text was scored on its own.
Scorecard
Each dimension is scored 0–3; the eight sum to the substance score out of 24.
Specific placeNames a specific location — from a region down to an exact creek, trail, road, or map reference.
Local knowledgeDraws on a first-hand connection to the place — visits, sustained activity, occupation, or a professional role.
EA analysisEngages the agency's environmental analysis directly.
Analytical gapIdentifies something the analysis fails to address.
EvidenceBacks claims with specific facts, data, or research.
RequestMakes a specific, actionable request of the agency.
AlternativeProposes a different course of action.
LegalCites statutes, regulations, or legal obligations.
How hard it is to set aside
A0 none: Counted, not answered.
Still open to the agency
Alternative already eliminatedThe agency says it considered and eliminated the alternative the comment proposes, with a reason. Cannot be defeated from the comment text alone.
Already addressedThe agency says its analysis already covers the point. Defeated when the comment cites the law itself: there is no analysis to cite against a statutory claim.
Deferred to a later decisionThe agency says the point belongs to a later, site-specific decision. Cannot be defeated from the comment text alone.
Misreads the proposalThe agency says the comment misunderstands what is proposed. Defeated when the comment engages the proposal or a named place directly.
Not requiredThe agency says the analysis the comment asks for is not required. Cannot be defeated from the comment text alone.
Preference notedThe agency notes the comment as a statement of preference and takes no action on it. Cannot be defeated from the comment text alone.
No cause and effect shownThe agency says the comment asserts a harm without showing how the action causes it. Defeated when the comment shows the mechanism.
Outside the scopeThe agency says the comment asks about a different action. Defeated when the comment is specific and tied to this proposal.
Certified not substantiveThe agency certifies the comment raises nothing substantive. Defeated when the comment alleges illegality, which is substantive by the definition the certification runs on.
Subject: Public Comment on Proposed Rule: Special Areas; Roadless Area Conservation (RIN 0596-AD66)
To Whom It May Concern, I am writing to submit a formal public comment in strong support of the proposed rule to rescind the 2001 Roadless Area Conservation Rule (RIN 0596-AD66).
As a private property inholder located directly west of George Peak in the Raft River Mountains (Sawtooth National Forest, Minidoka Ranger District), my family is directly impacted by the rigid restrictions of the 2001 national mandate. The Raft River range features a highly complex checkerboard of private inholdings and public land. While federal law guarantees inholders "adequate access" to their properties, the 2001 Roadless Rule introduces an extraordinary and punitive layer of federal bureaucracy for basic, low-impact private land use.
Specifically, we are planning to construct an off-grid cabin on our private land. While we utilize existing classified system roads (FR-004 and FR-009) for transit, the surrounding Inventoried Roadless Area (IRA) restriction severely complicates the logistics of moving structural materials and essential equipment across the final boundary to our property line. Under the current rule, even temporary, zero-impact access or staging requires exhaustive, multi-year NEPA reviews that strain both landowner finances and local Forest Service resources.
Furthermore, the blanket 2001 rule severely restricts the flexibility of local forest managers to quickly approve necessary wildfire mitigation and hazardous fuel reduction efforts along our shared private-public boundaries.
I strongly recommend that the USDA finalize this proposed rule to rescind the national 2001 Roadless Rule. Removing this blanket restriction will return land management authority to local Forest Service officials who possess a nuanced understanding of the Raft River division's unique topography and private property boundaries. Local managers are entirely capable of protecting the environment through standard Land and Resource Management Plans without maintaining a restrictive, nationwide barrier that infringes on the practical exercise of private property rights.
Thank you for your time and consideration of these pertinent issues.
Sincerely,
Daniel Patrick Gorney, A Utah Inholding Landowner
Manager, Oquirrh Endevours LLC, a Utah Corporation
Tremonton, UT 84337